Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 246

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Constraints on intrinsic alignment contamination of weak lensing surveys using the MegaZ-LRG sample

Open access
Joachimi, B., Mandelbaum, R., Abdalla, F. B., Bridle, S. L.·2011·Astronomy & Astrophysics

Abstract

Correlations between the intrinsic shapes of galaxies and the large-scale galaxy density field provide an important tool to investigate galaxy intrinsic alignments, which constitute the major potential astrophysical systematic in cosmological weak lensing (cosmic shear) surveys, but also yield insight into the formation and evolution of galaxies. We measure galaxy position-shape correlations in the MegaZ-LRG sample for more than 800 000 luminous red galaxies for comoving transverse separations of 0.3 < rp < 60 h-1 Mpc, making the first such measurement with a photometric redshift sample. In combination with a re-analysis of several spectroscopic SDSS samples, we constrain an intrinsic alignment model for early-type galaxies over long baselines in redshift (z ≲ 0.7) and luminosity (4 mag) with high statistical precision. We develop and test the formalism to incorporate photometric redshift scatter in the modelling of these observations. For rp > 6 h-1 Mpc, the fits to galaxy position-shape correlation functions are consistent with the scaling with rp and redshift of a revised, nonlinear version of the linear alignment model (Hirata & Seljak 2004) for all samples. An extra redshift dependence ∝ (1 + z)ηother is constrained to ηother = −0.3 ± 0.8 (1σ). To obtain consistent amplitudes for all data, an additional dependence on galaxy luminosity ∝ Lβ with is required. The normalisation of the intrinsic alignment power spectrum is found to be for galaxies at redshift 0.3 and r band magnitude of − 22 (k- and evolution-corrected to z = 0). Assuming zero intrinsic alignments for blue galaxies, we assess the bias on cosmological parameters for a tomographic CFHTLS-like lensing survey given our new constraints on the intrinsic alignment model parameter space. Both the resulting mean bias and its uncertainty are smaller than the 1σ statistical errors when using the constraints from all samples combined. The addition of MegaZ-LRG data is critical to achieving constraints this strong, reducing the uncertainty in intrinsic alignment bias on cosmological parameters by factors of three to seven.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/0004-6361/201015621

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 246

Metadata

Authors
Joachimi, B., Mandelbaum, R., Abdalla, F. B., & Bridle, S. L.
Venue
Astronomy & Astrophysics
Publisher
EDP Sciences
Published
2011-01-20
Volume
527
Pages
A26
ISSN
  • 0004-6361 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0746
OpenAlex
W2111716398
Cited by
246
References
6
FWCI
4.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Constraints on intrinsic alignment contamination of weak lensing surveys using the MegaZ-LRG sample. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1051/0004-6361/201015621
The paper
Joachimi, B., Mandelbaum, R., Abdalla, F. B., & Bridle, S. L. (2011). Constraints on intrinsic alignment contamination of weak lensing surveys using the MegaZ-LRG sample. Astronomy & Astrophysics. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201015621

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.